DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter.
Furthermore, there is no apparent reason why applicant was prevented from presenting claims corresponding to those of the instant application during prosecution of the application which matured into a patent. See In re Schneller, 397 F.2d 350, 158 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1968). See also MPEP § 804.
Claim(s) 20-21, 30-31 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim (s) 6 of U.S. Patent No. (11,617,035 B2). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because instant application which merely disclose in substance of “determining characteristic of room based on sensor and audio data” is a broader aspect of the patented claims and thus would have been anticipated by the prior patented as presented.
Claim(s) 20-21, 30-31 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim (s) 17 of U.S. Patent No. (12,185,066 B2). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because instant application which merely disclose in substance of “determining characteristic of room based on sensor and audio data” is a broader aspect of the patented claims and thus would have been anticipated by the prior patented as presented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 20-24, 26, 28-34, 36, 38-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a (2) as being anticipated by Robinson et al. (US 11,222,385).
20. (New) A system comprising: an audio device comprising a microphone (fig.4 (435)); a non-acoustic sensor configured to provide sensor data (fig.4 (425, 430)), wherein the audio device and the non-acoustic sensor are located in a room (fig.2/4 (110); col.6 line 25-67); and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the audio device and the non- acoustic sensor, any of the one or more processors configured to: receive audio data from the microphone; receive the sensor data from the non-acoustic sensor (fig.4 (420); fig.6 (620/130); col.18 line 15-20 & col.19 line 1-15); responsive to receiving the audio data and the sensor data, determine one or more characteristics of the room based on both the audio data and the sensor data (col.4 line 40-67 & col.5 line 35-45; col.8 line 45-67); and modify an operational characteristic of the system based on the one or more characteristics of the room (col.13 line 1-6; col.19 line 55-67).
21. (New) The system of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are configured to determine the one or more characteristics of the room by determining a configuration of the room based on both the audio data and the sensor data (col.4 line 40-67 & col.5 line 35-45; col.8 line 45-67).
22. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the configuration of the room comprises one or more of positions or orientations of one or more objects in the room (col.4 line 60-col.5 line 15).
23. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the configuration of the room comprises a material of one or more objects in the room (col.6 line 25-67 & col.7 line 1-15).
24. (New) The system of claim 21, wherein the configuration of the room comprises one or more of a dimension of the room or a shape of the room (col.8 line 50-67).
26. (New) The system of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are configured to modify the operational characteristic of the system by adjusting an operational characteristic of the audio device (col.13 line 1-6; col.19 line 55-67).
28. (New) The system of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: responsive to receiving the audio data and the sensor data, determine a location in the room of a device of the system based on both the audio data and the sensor data; and generate an augmented reality image of the room including the device of the system based on the determined location in the room of the device (fig.1-2/4 (110); col.2 line 50-67; col.4 line 40-col.5 line 15).
29. (New) The system of claim 28, wherein the one or more processors are configured to generate the augmented reality image by indicating optimal locations for the device of the system in the room based on both the audio data and the sensor data (fig.1-2/4 (110); col.2 line 50-67; col.4 line 40-col.5 line 15).
30. (New) A method comprising: receiving audio data at one or more processors from a microphone of an audio device (fig.4 (435)); receiving sensor data at the one or more processors from a non-acoustic sensor, wherein the audio device and the non-acoustic sensor are located in a room (fig.4 (420); fig.6 (620/130); col.6 line 25-67; col.18 line 15-20 & col.19 line 1-15); responsive to receiving the audio data and the sensor data, determining one or more characteristics of the room based on both the audio data and the sensor data, using the one or more processors (col.4 line 40-67 & col.5 line 35-45; col.8 line 45-67); and modifying, using the one or more processors, an operational characteristic of a system based on the one or more characteristics of the room, wherein the system comprises the audio device, the non-acoustic sensor, and the one or more processors (fig.6 (600); col.13 line 1-6; col.19 line 55-67)..
31. (New) The method of claim 30, wherein determining the one or more characteristics of the room comprises determining a configuration of the room based on both the audio data and the sensor data, using the one or more processors col.4 line 40-67 & col.5 line 35-45; col.8 line 45-67).
32. (New) The method of claim 31, wherein the configuration of the room comprises one or more of positions or orientations of one or more objects in the room (col.4 line 60-col.5 line 15).
33. (New) The method of claim 31, wherein the configuration of the room comprises a material of one or more objects in the room (col.6 line 25-67 & col.7 line 1-15).
34. (New) The method of claim 31, wherein the configuration of the room comprises one or more of a dimension of the room or a shape of the room (col.8 line 50-67).
36. (New) The method of claim 30, wherein modifying the operational characteristic of the system comprises adjusting an operational characteristic of the audio device (col.13 line 1-6; col.19 line 55-67).
38. (New) The method of claim 30, further comprising: responsive to receiving the audio data and the sensor data, determining a location in the room of a device of the system based on both the audio data and the sensor data, using the one or more processors; and generating an augmented reality image of the room including the device of the system based on the determined location in the room of the device, using the one or more processors (fig.1-2/4 (110); col.2 line 50-67; col.4 line 40-col.5 line 15).
39. (New) The method of claim 38, wherein generating the augmented reality image comprises indicating optimal locations for the device of the system in the room based on both the audio data and the sensor data, using the one or more processors (fig.1-2/4 (110); col.2 line 50-67; col.4 line 40-col.5 line 15).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 25, 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson et al. (US 11,222,385) and Andrews et al. (US 2013/0190041 A1).
25. (New) The system of claim 20, wherein the non-acoustic sensor comprises one or more cameras (fig.4 (425/430)), however, none of the prior art specify as wherein the one or more processors are configured to determine the one or more characteristics of the room based on the sensor data from each of the one or more cameras and based on the audio data (Robinson, col.18 line 15-20 & col.19 line 1-15).
However, Robinson neve specify of triangulation being used. However, Andrews et al. disclose of the general concept of determining certain characteristics in a room according to triangulation algorithm (par [18]). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such aspect related to triangulation being used in determining characteristic so as to determine direction or position according to a particular algorithm using the various input signals.
Th claim(s) 35 which in substance disclose of the same feature as that to claim(s) 25 has been analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 27, 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson et al. (US 11,222,385) and Kaburlasos et al. (US 10,080,095 B2).
27. (New) The system of claim 20, but the prior art lacked of the specific as (wherein the one or more processors are configured to modify the operational characteristic of the system by adjusting an operational characteristic of a camera.
However, kaburlasos et al. disclose of the similar aspect related to processors are configured to modify the operational characteristic of the system by adjusting an operational characteristic of a camera (col.4 line 40-55). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such noted aspect related to processors are configured to modify the operational characteristic of the system by adjusting an operational characteristic of a camera so as to provide the optimal spatialized sound according to current monitor conditions.
Th claim(s) 37 which in substance disclose of the same feature as that to claim(s) 27 has been analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DISLER PAUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-6:00 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, chin, Vivian can be reached at (571) 272-7848. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DISLER PAUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights